Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:00:58 +0100 From: Christer Solskogen <christer.solskogen@gmail.com> To: Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS / zpool size Message-ID: <CAMVU60ahgmyK60h83jN9r0VYAWROnMtuz5K_1db0_p=EUZUm5Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CADt0fhyg8uXQG8SjWPL2DizZRNTdN9poRjo8Y=c62vN4W7iK6w@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMVU60ZtHp%2B_mhuUh-5RuLNW9XFRxBdfQxXu9vPEzw-P%2BrLUUw@mail.gmail.com> <CADt0fhyg8uXQG8SjWPL2DizZRNTdN9poRjo8Y=c62vN4W7iK6w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> wrote: > The `zpool` command does not show all the overhead from ZFS. The `zfs` > command does. That's why the `zfs` command shows less available space > than the `zpool` command. > A overhead of almost 300GB? That seems a bit to much, don't you think? The pool consist of one vdev with two 1,5TB disks and one 3TB in raidz1. -- chs,
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAMVU60ahgmyK60h83jN9r0VYAWROnMtuz5K_1db0_p=EUZUm5Q>